The Stax thread (New) - Page 1394

Same here, the warranty issues and wait time put me off from buying the 009 at PriceJapan (I also got them from Justin, great guy), however back then it was 4300$~. The yen has certainly dropped at an incredible speed after the new ministers financial plans proceedings.

 

Pushover.... 

Why is it that Lambdas (and usually Stax in general) seem to have a forum reputation for "no bass"? I listen primarily to EDM on my SR-303s and they can have massive kick when the song calls for it.

+1, was surprised when heard my SR-202 first time.

 

Those that say they don't have bass are either 1. bassheads, 2. bassheads, 3. never heard a Stax before.

 

The only Stax headphones I've tried that have hardly any bass are the old SR-X's, SR-30 - 80 electret line and the SR-404's. 

Edited by DefQon - 2/6/13 at 4:00pm

A number of factors have contributed to the "electrostats don't have bass" myth:

 

1.  Impact vs SPL.  Saying they don't have bass is implying the frequency response of the bass is shelved down or rolled off.  Properly sealed electrostats are flat in the bass, but most electrostats do have less bass impact than your typical dynamic.  Some of this is due to the limited excursion of the diaphragm.  The distance between the diaphragm and stators has to be kept really small though so the electrostatic force can act upon them.  You could increase the spacer thickness, but you'd need to greatly increase the bias voltage.

 

2.  Reputation of older Stax headphones.  The really old Stax headphones had smaller drivers and kinda crappy earpads that didn't seal well, resulting in bass roll off.  Even many of the Lambdas can be hard to get a perfect seal with.  When you break the seal of an electrostat, you start getting roll off below the resonance frequency which happens to be in the bass spectrum.  Once you are able to get a perfect seal, though, the frequency response will be flat beyond the audible range of human hearing (around 20 Hz).

 

3.  Reputation of electrostatic speakers.  Speakers are naturally open air and not sealed to your ears, so all electrostatic speakers roll off beyond the resonance frequency.  In order to "push" this frequency down (as in roll off less/lower in the bass), you need to use larger panels.  This quickly gets out of hand though, as the panels required to do flat sub bass would be enormous.  Audiophiles seem to have a tendency to apply laws that work for certain components to other components as well, even when it makes no sense ( electrostatic speakers -> headphones, turntable anti vibration -> everything needs vibration control, turntables needing to be set at a perfect RPM leading to the birth of "PRAT" -> everything has PRAT, early digital was crap -> digital will always be crap, etc. ).

 

4.  Typical bass response of electrostats vs dynamics.  As mentioned earlier, a well sealed electrostat or planar magnetic headphone will be completely flat in the bass and sub bass.  A typical (good) dynamic's frequency response looks a little different.  They tend to have a little hump in the mid bass (slight bass emphasis) and then roll off a little in the sub bass (slight bass deficiency).  You can see why many of us say Stax have an accurate level of bass.  I think many audiophiles are accustomed to that slight emphasis in the mid bass.

It's mostly the impact that you miss with electrostats. Listen to a good recording with strong bass drum hits with an electrostat and a dynamic and even though the stat likely has more spl and better response down to inaudibility, the dynamic will sound more right. This isn't always that noticeable, but certain genres and recordings will reveal this difference.

I'm not convinced more impact = more accurate.  For example, I think the LCD2's level of bass impact is completely over emphasized, yet people were praising those for their "accurate amount of impact".  Seems like people are used to kick drums being played through dynamic concert speakers at 120 dB hitting them in the chest and confusing that with neutrality.  I think it really depends on the instrument, personally.  Some instruments should have the impact of a LCD2 (or more) and others should have the impact of a SR-Lambda (or less).  No transducer will be able to vary its impact, so maybe the ability of mics to capture 'impact' and not just SPL is inadequate...arnaud, your thoughts?

I agree. It is a thing that is hard to describe and decide about. When I heard my first electrostats (SR202, 303, 404) at a meet when my personal rig was balanced HD600 I was tempted to buy the SR202 from the guy who was showing them. I thought they were better as a whole, and still think that, but there is something about the impact that lends it more realism despite being less accurate (most dynamic headphones are less accurate overall, but in particular the bass is much more distorted). I ended up staying with the HD600 because of it. Sadly with the loudness wars taking away dynamics from many modern rock recordings, that impact is less evident, so in a way, electrostats are better with modern rock than classic rock, assuming modern is compressed. When I had the SR-007 mk1 and have listened to the SR-009 at meets this sensation of lost impact is greatly reduced, but still lingers. The SR-007 in particular sounded very good in the bass giving a good punch, though still not quite as hard of an edge as a dynamic. I'd love to listen to the Jades and HE-90 again to compare their impact, but I only listened to a few songs on each and don't recall them well enough to describe that particular aspect. I remember them both having excellent bass overall.

I had the LCD-2 previously and now the modest 007/717 rig... I can't say I miss the LCD-2's in the bass area. 007's hit hard/extend more than well enough.  What I do miss about the LCD-2 sometimes is their more intimate in-your face mids/vocals that can be very good for some materials sometimes to my ears.  007's are without a doubt excellent in midrange/vocal presentation as well but it's done in a different way (more air and transparency but more backed off than the LCD-2s).

 

One day when I can easily afford it I'll buy the LCD-2's again, they're great headphones as well with it's own character. Not in a hurry to though and I know 007's would still get 80% of my head time anyway. 

Edited by K_19 - 2/6/13 at 6:20pm

009s have a ton of bass... about on par with Lcd 3s.

So I sold my Stax Sigma for 565.00 to an individual who has been banned from here on numerous occasions  and he is now selling them at ebay for 1399.00.

He is even using my pictures!

This is my for sale post:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/645056/stax-sigma-normal-bias#post_9053555

and this is his at ebay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/STAX-SR-SIGMA-ELECTROSTATIC-HEADPHONES-bundle-SR-7-energizer-superb-Mint-/111009205349?pt=US_Headphones&hash=item19d8aa0c65

I realize everybody wants to make a buck, but this guy has no shame. Only thing I can do is expose him for what he is.

So you know not to deal with him, he is from El Cerrito, CA. 

I have talked to Currawong about this lowlife.

 

EDIT: they are not my pictures. But I am pretty sure is the Sigma I sold.

Sigma SN: 06356

SRD7 SN: 23113

Edited by gilency - 2/6/13 at 10:55pm

I have been looking at his stuff for a long good while, didn't know he was banned from here, other than his inflated prices for the vintage Yama orthos and the Sigma Pro's, wiktor.pl is another one (but he owns a serious amount of gear so he milks from most of his sales).

The best bass I've heard from a headphone is lambda signature,sounds realistic

507 has more impact, but it has less texture, and the mid bass is a bit unnatural

 

both bass are far better than hd600 IMHO, the hd600 bass is nothing like the real thing

Edited by pkshan - 2/6/13 at 10:17pm